From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu May 20 11:48:55 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from picnic.mat.net (picnic.mat.net [206.246.122.133]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7A0814CC0 for ; Thu, 20 May 1999 11:48:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from chuckr@picnic.mat.net) Received: from localhost (chuckr@localhost) by picnic.mat.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA75315; Thu, 20 May 1999 14:47:12 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 14:47:12 -0400 (EDT) From: Chuck Robey To: Dan Moschuk Cc: "Pedro J. Lobo" , hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Database holywars? In-Reply-To: <19990520144215.E94835@trinsec.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, 20 May 1999, Dan Moschuk wrote: > > | ¿Have you considered PostgreSQL? It is on the ports collection, and is a > | heavy duty database engine, with transactions, subqueries (only partial > | support), etc. Version 6.5 will be released in about two weeks, and it > | adds MVCC (multi-version concurrency control), which will improve a lot > | its multi-user capabilities. And, I know of some projects that are using > | it for multi-GB databases. I've been using it for or student database > | for more than two years (since version 6.0), and am quite happy with > | it. See www.postgresql.org for more information. > > If I recall correctly, isn't postgresql *based* off of the Berkeley DB > engine? I don't know, but it's irrelevant. The point is, do you use an intervening compatibility layer (sql) for your database, or not. There has to be a low level layer, but if postgresql uses any particular one isn't of any importance here, you understand? It's just figuring the costs, on the one hand, what you gain in speed, on the other hand, what you give up in reconfigurability and portability. You won't find the commercial db having a Berkeley DB interface. If you want that final move to be as painless and bug free as you can make it (if that's of real importance, and you just can't keep the db in C and move it as C code) then you're going to want sql. There isn't any one right answer here. Note your requirements, and see which method meets your goals closest. If you want to argue this further, we should take it offline, it's ceased to be interesting to the list at large. > > -Dan > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message > ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- Chuck Robey | Interests include any kind of voice or data chuckr@picnic.mat.net | communications topic, C programming, and Unix. 213 Lakeside Drive Apt T-1 | Greenbelt, MD 20770 | I run picnic (FreeBSD-current) (301) 220-2114 | and jaunt (Solaris7). ----------------------------+----------------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message